SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Should wearing a lifejacket be mandatory?

13K views 111 replies 44 participants last post by  Valiente 
#1 ·
We've had a rash of drownings in Ontario this summer. Some of them have been swimmers, but there's now a move afoot to make it mandatory for boaters to wear a lifejacket/PFD rather than just have it on board. Transport Canada is reviewing the regs, and on August 12 the commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police issued a public statement supporting the idea of mandatory wear. No one is making distinctions between size or class of vessel.
I've already had a shot at this subject on my cruising blog. I quite often wear a pfd when sailing my C&C 27, as well as a safety harness (which the law doesn't require) but I think requiring lifejackets to be worn on all vessels, all the time, is regulatory overkill. It's like making all drivers and passengers in automobiles wear helmets because motorcyclists are prone to head injuries. I do think it should be mandatory for vessels 6 meters or less, which would take care of the vast majority of "problem" boats. (Besides, anyone with an ounce of common sense is already wearing a pfd when they're in a canoe, a kayak, or a sailing dinghy, not to mention a yacht tender.) I could go on, but I won't. Wondering instead how other people feel about this.
 
#2 ·
I live in Oregon. I believe we have a state law that requires any one under the age of 12 has to were a pfd on docks and aboard any size vessel, unless inside the cabin.
Canoes, kayaks etc is mandatory to where
We have a club rule, when doing club function racing, committee boat or cruise in to where one.
How ever when just mucking about we have to have one at the ready per person on board.

Seems to work here. We have had one or two river drownings this year, swimmers.

Have you thought about have to where up to a certain age group?
 
#5 ·
Age-mandatory for one thing sounds good. We already have age limits on operating personal watercraft (jet skis).
We don't have strict rules at our club about wearing pfds on work projects, but when we assemble the sailing club's floating docks in the spring (and take them apart in the fall) the designated foreman has generally asked people to put one on, as the water is pretty cold on Georgian Bay on the shoulders of the season. People do put them on.
 
#7 ·
Here's the Oregon state law on lifejackets. Mandatory wear is limited to kids (with exceptions) and boats on class III rivers.

General:

All boats must carry at least one U.S. Coast Guard-approved personal flotation device (PFD) for every person aboard. Such devices must be in serviceable condition. They must not have any rips, tears, or broken straps. All devices must also be kept readily accessible for use in an emergency situation. Personal flotation devices in a plastic bag or in a storage compartment are not readily accessible.

Persons being towed are considered on board the towing boat and there must be an approved Type I, II, or III device aboard for each.

Children age 12 and under must wear a U.S. Coast Guard-approved life jacket at all times while on an open deck or cockpit of vessels that are underway or when being towed. Inflatable PFD's are not approved for children.

State Law -Specific terms:

No person shall operate a boat on Oregon waters with a child age 12 and under unless the child is wearing a U.S. Coast Guard-approved personal flotation device (PFD)/life jacket, of the appropriate size, while the boat is underway. Children on an open deck or cockpit of sailboats, motorized and non-motorized vessels (canoes, kayaks, rafts) underway must wear a life jacket at all times.


Beginning January 1, 2010, ORS 830.215 will be amended to read:
NEW (3) Notwithstanding the classification by the State Marine Board of the types of personal flotation devices approved for various classes of vessels pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, a person operating a boat on any section of waters rated class III or higher on a commonly accepted scale of river difficulty, and all passengers in the boat, shall wear a properly secured personal flotation device. The personal flotation device must be of a type prescribed by rules adopted by the State Marine Board.
(See carriage requirements and PFD Types below).

Exceptions:

* While child is below deck, or in an enclosed cabin of a boat.
* When the child is on a sailboat and tethered by lifeline or harness that is attached to the sailboat.
* When the child is on a U.S. Coast Guard-inspected passenger-carrying vessel operating in navigable waters of the U.S.
 
#11 ·
ISAF rule 1.2 states:

1.2 Life-Saving Equipment and Personal Flotation Devices
A boat shall carry adequate life-saving equipment for all persons on
board, including one item ready for immediate use, unless her class
rules make some other provision. Each competitor is individually
responsible for wearing a personal flotation device adequate
for the conditions.
 
#10 ·
I don't think the gov't should be in the business of trying to legislate common sense.

On our boat, the rules are: PFD and clipped in after dark; PFD if going forward of the cockpit when there are whitecaps. I've also heard of the odd boat rule PFD if the sum of air temp plus water temp is less than 85 degrees (Farenheit)
 
#13 ·
Our Country reflects more and more the ways of Communist Countries. Our Government wants to regulate anything it can get its hands on and enforce new stupid laws like bringing the alcohol limit down to .05 for DUI. You'll never catch me wearing a lifejacket in a sailboat in moderate winds, it's nonsense....law or not. Kids, I believe should be treated differently.

These people we have drowning are being stupid when the accident happens. One guy dove into rapids to try and save his daughter...he had no life jacket. What do you expect. His daughter should maybe have been wearing one. The other accidents were preventable as well. Like everything else, it takes a couple of idiots to ruin it for the rest of us.
 
#14 ·
I agree with the 12 and under should be manadory, beyond that NO, keep them readily accessible and allow common sence to dictates there use.

I also think having different brands or colors of PFD's ( same functions and features ) is a good idea, that makes it easily identifiable who is fitted to which PFD and everyone will be fimilar with each device regardless who wears it
 
#19 ·
I agree with the 12 and under should be manadory, beyond that NO, keep them readily accessible and allow common sence to dictates there use.

I also think having different brands or colors of PFD's ( same functions and features ) is a good idea, that makes it easily identifiable who is fitted to which PFD and everyone will be fimilar with each device regardless who wears it
It wasn't that long ago in Canada that you could only get lifejackets and pfds in yellow and red, for SAR reasons. But pressure from the US market forced regulators to relent and allow whatever color you want, including camoflage and Mickey Mouse and Goofy cartoons. The logic was that people would be more willing to actually wear them if they made some kind of fashion statement.
 
#17 ·
More regulation

I am personally against any gummint intrusion into our life. And one thing I learned a looooooong time ago is no amount of laws can overcome stupidity. Any one who won't wear a life vest when needed is stupid. PERIOD I wear a self inflating when it gets nasty, when I have to get up on deck, and a lot when single handing. They are relatively comfortable, and I trust them. But they are not CG legal, and if the law were changed to require a vest to be worn, they would probably not count. So, if you haven't figgered it out, my vote is NO NO NO
 
#20 ·
I am personally against any gummint intrusion into our life. And one thing I learned a looooooong time ago is no amount of laws can overcome stupidity. Any one who won't wear a life vest when needed is stupid. PERIOD I wear a self inflating when it gets nasty, when I have to get up on deck, and a lot when single handing. They are relatively comfortable, and I trust them. But they are not CG legal, and if the law were changed to require a vest to be worn, they would probably not count. So, if you haven't figgered it out, my vote is NO NO NO
Don't know what you mean by "not CG legal." Inflatables are legal as PFDs in Canada, anyway, and are very common. The marine police wear them.
 
#22 ·
I believe Maryland law mandates life vest wearing for kids under a certain age (our kids are all adults and we don't have any grandkids yet (sigh) so not sure of the exact age). That being said, my wife and I always wear auto-inflatables when on deck -- inflatables are USCG-approved as type V life vests -- and we offer them to our guests who usually put them on when we go out. However, I'm of two minds about mandatory wearing of life vests. On the negative side, I don't like the govenrment tell us what to do in yet another area where we should take personal responsibility; on the positive side life vests do save lives, but only when they're used. Not sure what side I'd come down on if I had to make a choice-- but I don't so I won't
 
#23 ·
Falling to sea is a very rare case. PFD's and life jackets might break your arm or injure you if you fall from some hight. I cannot imagine myself wearing a life jacket in a summer month.

I think the rule works:

If you forc everybody to wear PFD's on all boats, most of the boaters will give up sailing in those waters, if no body sails no body will be drowned and the rule seems to work.
 
#26 ·
I think it's pretty funny how this same debate rang through about wearing seatbelts and how uncomfortable they are. This should be a no brainer.

Valiente-I've never heard it put so poetically. As a Canadian, I find it wierd driving through some states and seeing people riding their morotcycles without helmets.
 
#27 ·
Should wearing a lifejacket be mandatory?

No Way!
 
#28 ·
I just can't believe how some people are so quick to give up their freedom.

When it comes to helmets and PFDs, I think people should have the freedom to do what they please. Smart people will wear appropriate safety gear when conditions merit. If I decide to hop on a quad and ride slowly across the camping area to get a cup of coffee... I should be able to do that without a helmet on (but it would be a ticket where I ride). If I'm jumping dunes and I'm not wearing a helmet, that's darwinism.

I wondered when I bought my kayak if I was forced to wear a PFD. That makes no sense to me. If I'm swimming, I don't need a PFD, but if I'm riding a giant flotation device I need one? I figured if I got questioned about it I'd just jump in the water and tow it to show how ridiculous it was.

Can we just take a state that nobody likes and turn it into this regulationville that some people crave? You'd need somebody with common sense so you could figure out what all the new laws needed to be, and surveillance cameras everywhere so they could be enforced. Maybe a new website, finepal, so you can easily pay your fines online.

I prefer Margaritaville myself.
 
#29 ·
Can we just take a state that nobody likes and turn it into this regulationville that some people crave? You'd need somebody with common sense
nOw...

Talking about government regulation and using the words "common sense" in the same paragraph is a non sequitur!!!:)

That's a major part of our problem - the writers and enforcers of our laws have no common sense!!!

Paul
 
#30 ·
I guess it all comes down to whether you feel you should have enough sense to wear a lifejacket in certain boats (or the right not exercise common sense), or if the law should tell you to do so. On my keelboat, I don't feel the law should tell me, even though I wear one routinely. But I've done enough canoeing, kayaking and dinghy racing over the years to know that it is just common sense to wear one in those small craft, because the likelihood of ending up in the water is high. Where I live, cold water is an additional complication. If the law decides it should be mandatory for small craft, so be it, at least where I live. Warm-water sailors may feel quite differently.
I can well recall how years ago in one-design racing all us macho sailors would wait for the Race Committee to hoist the lifejacket flag before thinking of putting one on. Now it's pretty much a given that you wear one all the time. If you've ever capsized a dinghy and had to right one, especially in waves, you'll know how quickly you tire. That's not when you need to be figuring out where your PFD has floated off to.
I can't imagine paddling a kayak without wearing one. If you're not wearing it, and the law requires one, where are you going to put it? If you capsize a kayak and find yourself hanging upside-down under water, you'll wish you had thought to put on the PFD. A guy early in the season this year flipped his kayak near Parry Sound. He had to struggle out of the boat, but at least he was wearing the PFD. The cops found him 30 minutes later, succumbing to hypothermia but afloat in his PFD and clinging to the boat. I'm sure he thought he was invincible.
So I guess my position is, IF the powers that be are thinking of regulating lifejacket use, let's limit it to the boats you should be wearing one in anyway, and where they will save the most lives. But it will also, as I've said, do away with a lot of time-wasting and invasive police inspections. (That said, when I was pulled over on Georgian Bay as I mentioned, I had my kids with me and everyone was wearing a PFD. The police just kept asking me to produce things, and I finally realized they were probably having me open every imaginable hatch so they could see if I had any open beer.)
 
#53 · (Edited)
That
I guess it all comes down to whether you feel you should have enough sense to wear a lifejacket in certain boats (or the right not exercise common sense)
That's the point. I do have the right not to exercise common sense. I'm an American. I am free.
At least so far and to some degree. I wonder how long it will last with so many people who think that everyone in our society should be treated as if we all had the same intellectual capacity as the most stupid among us.

That
Valiente said:
So all you people who get revived after drowning, but are brain damaged and require your bottoms wiped...until you die 50 years from now...do I have the freedom to cut your irresponsible fecking throats to save the five million bucks wasted on keeping your stupid husk alive?
I know for a fact that there are a lot of people who think that taking a small sailing vessel to sea and subjecting one's self to the whims of nature, especially with a family, is the epitome of stupidity.

What say we let the majority decide if we should be allowed the freedom to pursue our chosen lifestyle. How bout it?
 
#31 ·
i think we have already too many government mandated intrusions into private life--when will it stop?? why can people not make themselves safe without government intervention?? why do people think that government should be required to make their personal lives safe?? why cannot the people do that themselves?? the government is not about personal safety--the government is about running country. lets keep it that way and use our own brains regarding personal safety. no there should be no more laws regulating the way in which we undertake our own personal safety. maybe there should be a law regarding what brand toothbrush a person should use or the toothpaste one should have to use--it all makes the same lack of sense to me.....kinda like taking kids to boats for a sail is child endangerment----lets get real here.....we do not need more laws--we need more common sense put into practice.
 
#32 ·
I do on the other hand have a different perspective...over and over the term of "common sense" is brought up yet isnt that why a law attempts to deal with..those that lack the common sense to be wearing one when we should be. It is somewhat perplexing that we want to make them laws for children but whats a childs opinion on this..wouldnt they want there father or mother to be around to take care of them. When should we be wearing one?? People seem think that common sense will never put them in the water in that situation. They are called "accidents" and no matter the precautionary measures you take you may be the one in the water...

Im just curious that if the push back is because of the "the government wont control me" attitude? If we all have so much common sense like we claim, wouldnt we all wear one all the time when out on the boat?

I guess your last thought maybe that if fact you will drown die all because you wouldnt wear a small nylon harness that inflates in the water and saves your life...but we sure showed those in government :rolleyes: our surviving children/spouses family and friends would be proud :confused:
 
#35 · (Edited)
I'm just curious that if the push back is because of the "the government wont control me" attitude? If we all have so much common sense like we claim, wouldn't we all wear one all the time when out on the boat?
I always wear one. I put it on when I leave the car and take it off when I get back to the car. I'm about the only one that does however. I race and no one wears a jacket unless the conditions are bad or the rules require it.
On the dock if I see someone over 18 wearing a LV it is very rare.

I wear a real life vest not an inflatable one because I don't even trust the inflatable's and it is cheaper.
I think a lot of our behavior is adapted from others, not decided personally. If we are new to boating or young we see more experienced boaters not wear life jackets so we don't wear one. The cycle is perpetuated
Welcome "Saved By The Jacket"
I look like a dork wearing my life jacket while everyone else is showing off their racing wear. I even get comments and looks. I just don't care anymore.

I don't think a life jacket is particularly uncomfortable I got used to it. I like the pockets in the front. I'm not a great swimmer and I figure that if I'm unexpectedly in the water I'm already having a bad day and if I'm wearing a life jacket I have a few moments to contemplate my most recent stupid move without having to concern myself with staying afloat.

I do have a funny story about how peer pressure can work either way. One captain I crew for regularly has a 10 year old daughter. Every time we go out she noticed I wear a LV and her father does not. One time she asked me about it. I explained my reasons. She made her dad promise he would wear the life jacket at all times like I do.
Smart kid.

As to whether it should be law I have very mixed feelings about that.
Supposedly wearing life vests would reduce casualties to less than half.
I think the only reason people don't is because other people don't.
If you stuck a Calvin Klein logo on one and some hot move star wore one you couldn't keep them in the stores.
 
#33 ·
Should wearing a lifejacket be mandatory?

Yes! Absolutely. Right after we pass a law that mandates that all pedestrians wear helmets at all times walking on public sidewalks.

After all, one might trip on a lump in the sidewalk and break his or her head, thus sparking a lawsuit against a municipality that failed to curtail sidewalk hazards. And we'd all pay the multimillion judgment. So it's in our common interest to protect against such possibilities.

OK folks. Now, let's get real.
 
#34 ·
I thought of that....the "life has risks" argument. Risks everywhere...but to what level...I guess the answer is what level of risk and how would the precautionary measure reduce those odds. Im thinking walking on the street does not carry the same amount of risk as going overboard on a boat..maybe Im wrong. If your killed as a pedestrian I doubt its something a helmet would have prevented. A PFD would most likely be the difference between life and death by providing enough time for you or the MOB to be rescued by the boat.

Again your decision..your family, friends and loved ones...maybe check with them first. ;)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top